SpaceCadetmustardoverlordSpaceCadetsaamAnd a huge amount of mass shootings are by white people...Do you run and put on a bullet proof vest every time you see a white person?
Is it enjoyable to talk about 2 completely unrelated situations and try and make them seem the same?
Most mass shootings have been mental health issues gone bad. A terrorist attack is a group of people intent on harming another group of people. Both can be stopped and prevented but they both required a different approach to solve. That is why they are different and separate issues.
1) I'm just gonna springboard off of this point to talk about a mostly unrelated but important topic, which is the exaggeration of the link between mental illness and violence- http://depts.washington.edu/mhreport/facts_violence.php
That is not to say that mass shootings are not often perpetrated by mentally ill people, I was just reminded of something that I thought people in this thread ought to know about.
2) saam's point does not require the two situations/motivations for them to be the same, it's about the level of overreaction and racial profiling that the rest of us commit after these events occur. Unless you have statistics to show that a larger percentage or even a larger total number of Muslims living in the U.S. are involved in terrorism than the percentage/amount of white people in the U.S. who commit gun violence, then acting that way afterwards is the same in both situations.
With 1.6 Billion Muslims in the world, if even 1% of them are extremists then we need to worry about 16 million of these idiots causing us harm. Lots of estimates are well above 1% so don't act like it was just 8 guys in Paris out for a stroll with guns and bombs completely not representative of a HUGE amount of people who agree with killing us.
Yes, and with the largest army in the world and relatively indiscriminate rules about what defines an enemy combatant, a lot of people need to worry about us causing them harm. It doesn't change the fact that your fear of Muslims is disproportionate to the actual likelihood that the dude who deliberately choose to immigrate to the United States that you see on the street is going to cause you harm.
SpaceCadetYou keep worrying about "statistics" and and whatever college professors paper you happen to read and agree with on a Friday night. While you and the medic do that, the next terror plot is being sketched out in some random house right now by a group of people who should not be in either country to begin with.
How did I know that, after I brought up actual fact, as well as terms like "American exceptionalism", you were going to make a blatant appeal to anti-intellectualism. Just because you are not smart enough to understand how what you're saying is filled with double standards and bigotry, doesn't mean others are not.
Yes, obviously we'd all like terrorists not to be in our country. We'd also like police officers to have a 100% rate of stopping murders before they happen, but the Bill of Rights protects against police officers committing unlawful searches and seizures and soldiers taking quarter in our houses, as well as gives us all due process, the right to an attorney, the right to be tried by a jury of our peers, etc. Unless we have a magic wand that we can wave that tells us exactly where the terrorists are, I don't see why we should have the right to harass innocent Americans, especially when our mistreatment of Muslims gives more ammunition to the rhetoric of groups like ISIS and helps them recruit more people.
[quote=SpaceCadet][quote=mustardoverlord][quote=SpaceCadet][quote=saam]
And a huge amount of mass shootings are by white people...Do you run and put on a bullet proof vest every time you see a white person?[/quote]
Is it enjoyable to talk about 2 completely unrelated situations and try and make them seem the same?
Most mass shootings have been mental health issues gone bad. A terrorist attack is a group of people intent on harming another group of people. Both can be stopped and prevented but they both required a different approach to solve. That is why they are different and separate issues.[/quote]
1) I'm just gonna springboard off of this point to talk about a mostly unrelated but important topic, which is the exaggeration of the link between mental illness and violence- http://depts.washington.edu/mhreport/facts_violence.php
That is not to say that mass shootings are not often perpetrated by mentally ill people, I was just reminded of something that I thought people in this thread ought to know about.
2) saam's point does not require the two situations/motivations for them to be the same, it's about the level of overreaction and racial profiling that the rest of us commit after these events occur. Unless you have statistics to show that a larger percentage or even a larger total number of Muslims living in the U.S. are involved in terrorism than the percentage/amount of white people in the U.S. who commit gun violence, then acting that way afterwards is the same in both situations.[/quote]
With 1.6 Billion Muslims in the world, if even 1% of them are extremists then we need to worry about 16 million of these idiots causing us harm. Lots of estimates are well above 1% so don't act like it was just 8 guys in Paris out for a stroll with guns and bombs completely not representative of a HUGE amount of people who agree with killing us.
[/quote]
Yes, and with the largest army in the world and relatively indiscriminate rules about what defines an enemy combatant, a lot of people need to worry about us causing them harm. It doesn't change the fact that your fear of Muslims is disproportionate to the actual likelihood that the dude who deliberately choose to immigrate to the United States that you see on the street is going to cause you harm.
[quote=SpaceCadet]
You keep worrying about "statistics" and and whatever college professors paper you happen to read and agree with on a Friday night. While you and the medic do that, the next terror plot is being sketched out in some random house right now by a group of people who should not be in either country to begin with.[/quote]
How did I know that, after I brought up actual fact, as well as terms like "American exceptionalism", you were going to make a blatant appeal to anti-intellectualism. Just because you are not smart enough to understand how what you're saying is filled with double standards and bigotry, doesn't mean others are not.
Yes, obviously we'd all like terrorists not to be in our country. We'd also like police officers to have a 100% rate of stopping murders before they happen, but the Bill of Rights protects against police officers committing unlawful searches and seizures and soldiers taking quarter in our houses, as well as gives us all due process, the right to an attorney, the right to be tried by a jury of our peers, etc. Unless we have a magic wand that we can wave that tells us exactly where the terrorists are, I don't see why we should have the right to harass innocent Americans, especially when our mistreatment of Muslims gives more ammunition to the rhetoric of groups like ISIS and helps them recruit more people.
BonafideTerrorist attacks are in no way shape or form the same as mass shootings except for the killing part, most people who commit these mass shootings have mental health issues, severe depression, are lonely outcasts etc. Terrorist attacks are organized groups of people who kill innocents for their own ideology of what is right, while the mass shooters know what they do is wrong, they just want to hurt people.
This is, to a degree, debatable. Not the part about individuals who commit mass shooting, but the part about terrorists. Obviously the Osama bin Ladens of the world are a different level of sociopath, but the individual 18 year old kids who blow themselves up have a lot of mental health issues, they just live in situations of occupation where they have learned that their lives are devalued and that committing such acts is the only way to bring value to themselves. It's messed up, sure, but not as different on an individual level as you might think.
[quote=Bonafide]Terrorist attacks are in no way shape or form the same as mass shootings except for the killing part, most people who commit these mass shootings have mental health issues, severe depression, are lonely outcasts etc. Terrorist attacks are organized groups of people who kill innocents for their own ideology of what is right, while the mass shooters know what they do is wrong, they just want to hurt people.[/quote]
This is, to a degree, debatable. Not the part about individuals who commit mass shooting, but the part about terrorists. Obviously the Osama bin Ladens of the world are a different level of sociopath, but the individual 18 year old kids who blow themselves up have a lot of mental health issues, they just live in situations of occupation where they have learned that their lives are devalued and that committing such acts is the only way to bring value to themselves. It's messed up, sure, but not as different on an individual level as you might think.
aim-A lot of you guys are showing your true colors, yikes. I'm sure that the Quran doesn't say kill for the hell of it knowing that none of you guys have read it for yourselves and just cherry picking verses. The media has done an exceptional job of pretty much nailing people of the Islamic race as a whole. No it's not just extremists of Islam but a certain sect of the Sunnis.
Just please stop bashing the religion in this thread if you're viewing it from an outsiders perspective!
Some facts for you. Don't generalize Sunnis because 90% of all muslims are Sunnis. Thats 90% of 1.6 billion people and not all of them are extremists I mean come on there are 1.6 billion muslims in the world if Islam bred terror everyone would be dead by now. The combines forces in total of Islamic State, Boko Haram and Al Qaeda makes up 0.003% of the global muslim population. Less than 2% of all terror attacks are carried out in the name of Islam. I've read the entire Quran, I've read the Bible as well. That doesn't make me an expert on this topic at all but its enough to prove to me that the majority of the people who posted in this thread about Islam haven't read the Quran and are forming prejudice opinions on Islam through their cherry picked verses of the Quran. The same people aren't able to put those verses into context or know what they actually mean because they lack the background knowledge to do so.
[quote=aim-]A lot of you guys are showing your true colors, yikes. I'm sure that the Quran doesn't say kill for the hell of it knowing that none of you guys have read it for yourselves and just cherry picking verses. The media has done an exceptional job of pretty much nailing people of the Islamic race as a whole. No it's not just extremists of Islam but a certain sect of the Sunnis.
Just please stop bashing the religion in this thread if you're viewing it from an outsiders perspective![/quote]
Some facts for you. Don't generalize Sunnis because 90% of all muslims are Sunnis. Thats 90% of 1.6 billion people and not all of them are extremists I mean come on there are 1.6 billion muslims in the world if Islam bred terror everyone would be dead by now. The combines forces in total of Islamic State, Boko Haram and Al Qaeda makes up 0.003% of the global muslim population. Less than 2% of all terror attacks are carried out in the name of Islam. I've read the entire Quran, I've read the Bible as well. That doesn't make me an expert on this topic at all but its enough to prove to me that the majority of the people who posted in this thread about Islam haven't read the Quran and are forming prejudice opinions on Islam through their cherry picked verses of the Quran. The same people aren't able to put those verses into context or know what they actually mean because they lack the background knowledge to do so.
Hisokatrashthe men's rights activist who made a youtube video of his motto a day before killing
I don't really see what made elliot rodger a men's rights activist. Seems much more like a failed pickup up artist. But far be it from a (feminist, leftist, whateverist) to confuse two groups of people with some overlap, that could get you called a racist in different circumstances.
Elliot Rodgers was pretty objectively a men's rights activist. Just as how every time people on that side of the fence post a video of some particularly bitchy social justice warrior with some goofy hair color yelling over someone else and saying ridiculous ad hominems to try to make a point about feminism as a whole, some people probably exploited our same biases towards anecdotal evidence in Rodgers' case. It doesn't change what the dude was, it could just be less relevant than those people would let on.
[quote=Hisoka][quote=trash][url=http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/anne-theriault-/elliot-rodger-shooting_b_5386818.html]the men's rights activist who made a youtube video of his motto a day before killing[/url][/quote] I don't really see what made elliot rodger a men's rights activist. Seems much more like a failed pickup up artist. But far be it from a (feminist, leftist, whateverist) to confuse two groups of people with some overlap, that could get you called a racist in different circumstances.[/quote]
Elliot Rodgers was pretty objectively a men's rights activist. Just as how every time people on that side of the fence post a video of some particularly bitchy social justice warrior with some goofy hair color yelling over someone else and saying ridiculous ad hominems to try to make a point about feminism as a whole, some people probably exploited our same biases towards anecdotal evidence in Rodgers' case. It doesn't change what the dude was, it could just be less relevant than those people would let on.
sacmustardoverlordThis is known as racial profiling, it is or should be illegal everywhere, and it will not have any affect on the ability of terrorist groups to commit atrocities, it will only hurt ordinary people.
Your government does it becuase it's effective: http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/07/09/racial-profiling-reported-in-nsa-fbi-surveillance
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airport_racial_profiling_in_the_United_States
Frank Cilluffo, former special assistant for Homeland Security under then-President George W. Bush, said "airports need to be 'profiling' based on behavior even though it's a 'dirty word.'"[11]
You just claimed it was effective and posted:
-a us news and world report article that only gave individual opinions on the situation with no evidence suggesting it was either effective OR ineffective
-a wikipedia page with an entire "criticism" section, including mentioning a study that suggests that, given how few terrorists there are relative to other people in general, the racial profiling component of the TSA's airport security is not a relevant factor in catching them
-a quote from a member of the Bush administration asserting his opinion with no evidence to back it up
So how are you deriving that conclusion?
sacMustard, do you know how dumb you sound with your delusional idealism, vs how things work in reality.
I do not, because I consider myself a reality-based person, hence why I read your links looking for actual evidence and found none.
sacYou're just like the people who go around, how everything should be free and "peace and love" while you are just an useful idiot who fell for subversion, the professionals who want to keep your country safe do it, not becuse they are racist, but becuase it works.
Yeah, you're definitely making a tangible and reality-based argument here, filled with empirical observations, statistics, and sound logic. I'm just a goddamn hippy though!
sacand if you don't think it does, how many coordinated terrorist attacks on USA soil are sucessfull since 9/11?
I never said increased airport security overall was not a necessity, nor did I begin to discuss the more murky topic of wiretaps and electronic surveillance IN GENERAL. I made a specific point about racial profiling, and have yet to see you present any evidence on that subject.
[quote=sac][quote=mustardoverlord]
This is known as racial profiling, it is or should be illegal everywhere, and it will not have any affect on the ability of terrorist groups to commit atrocities, it will only hurt ordinary people.
[/quote]
Your government does it becuase it's effective: http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/07/09/racial-profiling-reported-in-nsa-fbi-surveillance
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airport_racial_profiling_in_the_United_States
Frank Cilluffo, former special assistant for Homeland Security under then-President George W. Bush, said "airports need to be 'profiling' based on behavior even though it's a 'dirty word.'"[11]
[/quote]
You just claimed it was effective and posted:
-a us news and world report article that only gave individual opinions on the situation with no evidence suggesting it was either effective OR ineffective
-a wikipedia page with an entire "criticism" section, including mentioning a study that suggests that, given how few terrorists there are relative to other people in general, the racial profiling component of the TSA's airport security is not a relevant factor in catching them
-a quote from a member of the Bush administration asserting his opinion with no evidence to back it up
So how are you deriving that conclusion?
[quote=sac]
Mustard, do you know how dumb you sound with your delusional idealism, vs how things work in reality.
[/quote]
I do not, because I consider myself a reality-based person, hence why I read your links looking for actual evidence and found none.
[quote=sac]
You're just like the people who go around, how everything should be free and "peace and love" while you are just an useful idiot who fell for subversion, the professionals who want to keep your country safe do it, not becuse they are racist, but becuase it works.
[/quote]
Yeah, you're definitely making a tangible and reality-based argument here, filled with empirical observations, statistics, and sound logic. I'm just a goddamn hippy though!
[quote=sac]
and if you don't think it does, how many coordinated terrorist attacks on USA soil are sucessfull since 9/11?[/quote]
I never said increased airport security overall was not a necessity, nor did I begin to discuss the more murky topic of wiretaps and electronic surveillance IN GENERAL. I made a specific point about racial profiling, and have yet to see you present any evidence on that subject.
drshdwpuppettrashhooli84% of egyptians believe that death is the appropriate punishment for leaving islam
http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2010/12/Pew-Global-Attitudes-Muslim-Report-FINAL-December-2-2010.pdf
When asked about the death penalty for those who leave the Muslim religion, at least
three-quarters of Muslims in Jordan (86%), Egypt (84%) and Pakistan (76%) say they
would favor making it the law; in Nigeria, 51% of Muslims favor and 46% oppose it.
In contrast, Muslims in Lebanon, Turkey and Indonesia largely reject the notion that
harsh punishments should be the law in their countries. About three-quarters of Turkish
and Lebanese Muslims oppose the stoning of people who commit adultery (77% and
76%, respectively), as does a narrower majority (55%) of Muslims in Indonesia.
why did you ignore the several countries which heavily rejected it shown from the exact same paragraph?
Its funny how differently that could be written.
A full 25% of Turkish Muslims think that, if anyone cheats on their spouse, they should be put to death. This isnt "25% of Turkish Muslims support the death penalty for murder". We are talking about a crime that... isn't a crime. At all.
Avast59% of Americans think torture is justified.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/new-poll-finds-majority-of-americans-believe-torture-justified-after-911-attacks/2014/12/16/f6ee1208-847c-11e4-9534-f79a23c40e6c_story.html
Of course, this is also interesting. Until you realize it isn't at all. In surveys, everything is literally about the question and how you ask it. Simply changing the wording on the question could yield exactly opposite results. Think about how you would respond to the question that was asked in that survey:
"All in all, Do you think the CIA's treatment of suspected terrorists was justified or unjustified."
Torture was not mentioned in the question. If you want to know if American's think torture is justified, you have to ask a different question. It took me a REALLY long time to come up with something that might be able to get that answer, and I think I have it: "Do you think torture is justified?". This pseudojournalistic media shitshow fuckery completely washes away all meaning of anything they try and talk about.
Philosophically, there are situations in which torturing a human being can be justified. Have all of our tortures been that way? No. Is that a problem? Yes. Does that even put us on the same plane of existence as firmly believing that apostasy, (consensual) sodomy, or adultery (all non-crimes) should be punishable by death? I surely fucking think not.
Um it isn't any sort of psuedo journalistic bullshit it was recently revealed that CIA interrogation techniques can be certainly qualified as torture, it was specifically asked if "forceful" interrogation techniques are justified. Which is another way of saying torture.
You could argue that not specifically saying torture changes the result but it's hard to argue with the fact that it is widely known that CIA techniques and treatment of prisoners was torture and the question was certainly asked with that fact understood.
Also I personally find it just as atrocious to torture another human being as it is to kill one, if not more so. If you don't think so idk what to say.
[quote=drshdwpuppet][quote=trash][quote=hooli]84% of egyptians believe that death is the appropriate punishment for leaving islam
http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2010/12/Pew-Global-Attitudes-Muslim-Report-FINAL-December-2-2010.pdf[/quote]
[quote]When asked about the death penalty for those who leave the Muslim religion, at least
three-quarters of Muslims in Jordan (86%), Egypt (84%) and Pakistan (76%) say they
would favor making it the law; in Nigeria, 51% of Muslims favor and 46% oppose it.
[b]In contrast, Muslims in Lebanon, Turkey and Indonesia largely reject the notion that
harsh punishments should be the law in their countries. About three-quarters of Turkish
and Lebanese Muslims oppose the stoning of people who commit adultery (77% and
76%, respectively), as does a narrower majority (55%) of Muslims in Indonesia.[/b] [/quote]
why did you ignore the several countries which heavily rejected it shown from the exact same paragraph?[/quote]
Its funny how differently that could be written.
A full 25% of Turkish Muslims think that, if anyone cheats on their spouse, they should be put to death. This isnt "25% of Turkish Muslims support the death penalty for murder". We are talking about a crime that... isn't a crime. At all.
[quote=Avast]59% of Americans think torture is justified.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/new-poll-finds-majority-of-americans-believe-torture-justified-after-911-attacks/2014/12/16/f6ee1208-847c-11e4-9534-f79a23c40e6c_story.html[/quote]
Of course, this is also interesting. Until you realize it isn't at all. In surveys, everything is literally about the question and how you ask it. Simply changing the wording on the question could yield exactly opposite results. Think about how you would respond to the question that was asked in that survey:
"All in all, Do you think the CIA's treatment of suspected terrorists was justified or unjustified."
Torture was not mentioned in the question. If you want to know if American's think torture is justified, you have to ask a different question. It took me a REALLY long time to come up with something that might be able to get that answer, and I think I have it: "Do you think torture is justified?". This pseudojournalistic media shitshow fuckery completely washes away all meaning of anything they try and talk about.
Philosophically, there are situations in which torturing a human being can be justified. Have all of our tortures been that way? No. Is that a problem? Yes. Does that even put us on the same plane of existence as firmly believing that apostasy, (consensual) sodomy, or adultery (all non-crimes) should be punishable by death? I surely fucking think not.[/quote]
Um it isn't any sort of psuedo journalistic bullshit it was recently revealed that CIA interrogation techniques can be certainly qualified as torture, it was specifically asked if "forceful" interrogation techniques are justified. Which is another way of saying torture.
You could argue that not specifically saying torture changes the result but it's hard to argue with the fact that it is widely known that CIA techniques and treatment of prisoners was torture and the question was certainly asked with that fact understood.
Also I personally find it just as atrocious to torture another human being as it is to kill one, if not more so. If you don't think so idk what to say.
ikpureThat is a great example of Islamophobia.
Did you read the post? It is 100% normal to associate unpleasant events with unpleasant thoughts, it has nothing to do with "racism" or "islamophobia", The same thing would happen if it were australians blowing people up - people would start associating negative thoughts and feelings towards australian people despite the fact that not all the australians were blowing stuff up. Its not racism or "islamophobia" to be scared of muslims nowadays, it is basic human psychology: negative events = negative feelings towards something.
mustardoverlord I fine it hard to take anything you say seriously anymore since your first argument was literally "ur a racist prick!!!" and I don't want to get into a big argument about this but I will try to explain my posts more clearly as I don't think I was getting my point across in the right way.
1st my post about the muslims sexual abuse this was me being angry at the law enforcement about not investigating because of "political correctness". I was using an example when Woogiebug pretty much summed up the point I was trying to make in a much better post.
WoogiebugPolitical Correctness is slowly killing our society and it looks like the Migrants and ISIS group are seeing it as a huge weakness/exploit.
When will everyone realise we've become consumed with making everyone happy and have forgotten to look after our own well being...
2nd I think the word "civilized" has too many interpretations and it might not have been the right word for me to use like you said (my english isn't very good so I don't always know the correct word to use). I was trying to point out that there is a big difference in culture between our countries in europe and the muslim dominated countries in the middle east and that sometimes people don't adapt very well to such a big difference in culture, this can be a problem with some migrants entering European countries.
[quote=ikpure]
That is a great example of Islamophobia.[/quote]
Did you read the post? It is 100% normal to associate unpleasant events with unpleasant thoughts, it has nothing to do with "racism" or "islamophobia", The same thing would happen if it were australians blowing people up - people would start associating negative thoughts and feelings towards australian people despite the fact that not all the australians were blowing stuff up. Its not racism or "islamophobia" to be scared of muslims nowadays, it is basic human psychology: negative events = negative feelings towards something.
mustardoverlord I fine it hard to take anything you say seriously anymore since your first argument was literally "ur a racist prick!!!" and I don't want to get into a big argument about this but I will try to explain my posts more clearly as I don't think I was getting my point across in the right way.
1st my post about the muslims sexual abuse this was me being angry at the law enforcement about not investigating because of "political correctness". I was using an example when Woogiebug pretty much summed up the point I was trying to make in a much better post.
[quote=Woogiebug]Political Correctness is slowly killing our society and it looks like the Migrants and ISIS group are seeing it as a huge weakness/exploit.
When will everyone realise we've become consumed with making everyone happy and have forgotten to look after our own well being...[/quote]
2nd I think the word "civilized" has too many interpretations and it might not have been the right word for me to use like you said (my english isn't very good so I don't always know the correct word to use). I was trying to point out that there is a big difference in culture between our countries in europe and the muslim dominated countries in the middle east and that sometimes people don't adapt very well to such a big difference in culture, this can be a problem with some migrants entering European countries.
KOBAOne could say that the context when this was written is different but this book is supposed to be written by allah and is supposed to guide muslims lifestyles
This double standard is part of the problem when it comes to discrimination against Muslims.
Fundamentalist Christians claim that the word of the Bible is inerrant, and that if something in reality seems to contradict the Bible, it must be REALITY that is wrong. They do not worship a God, they worship a book. Fundamentalist Muslims are the exact same way. Both texts contain many passages that, when one is not allowed to interpret and contextualize them, seem to promote abhorrent practices. Moderate members of both religions believe that their holy books were either based on God's word/the word of angels but dictated to and interpreted by mere men, or were entirely written by men based on events they witnessed or were told about. If you are not allowed this sort of leeway, then you can start talking about the most objectionable aspects of the religious text, not to mention the actual contradictions present in some of them, due to their multiple authors.
[quote=KOBA]
One could say that the context when this was written is different but this book is supposed to be written by allah and is supposed to guide muslims lifestyles[/quote]
This double standard is part of the problem when it comes to discrimination against Muslims.
Fundamentalist Christians claim that the word of the Bible is inerrant, and that if something in reality seems to contradict the Bible, it must be REALITY that is wrong. They do not worship a God, they worship a book. Fundamentalist Muslims are the exact same way. Both texts contain many passages that, when one is not allowed to interpret and contextualize them, seem to promote abhorrent practices. Moderate members of both religions believe that their holy books were either based on God's word/the word of angels but dictated to and interpreted by mere men, or were entirely written by men based on events they witnessed or were told about. If you are not allowed this sort of leeway, then you can start talking about the most objectionable aspects of the religious text, not to mention the actual contradictions present in some of them, due to their multiple authors.
Sheepylol2112The Bible is actually way more violent and spiteful than the Qur'an
Please don't say things like this I actually find it offensive. Out of all the stupid posts in this thread this is the only one that has made me mad. Sure the bible has violence but it is nothing like the quran at all. Really this has to be one of the most ignorant statements I have seen on here. Before you reply could you please go out and read both the quran and the bible (which is something you obviously haven't done) and then think about what you said.
Also peaceful religion am i right guys? xD http://i.imgur.com/uP80YOm.jpg
Posts like this are the reason no one can take you seriously. You bristle like crazy the second anyone points out how you're making a double standard specifically for Islam, and in the same post attack the religion like crazy with snarky sarcasm and an actual fucking xD. For the record, the Bible is exactly like the Quran in terms of the crazy amounts of violence and intolerance it is filled with, including actions condoned by God, actions committed in the name of God, and actions committed BY God. An Alien coming to Earth would have a pretty hard fucking time distinguishing between the two.
[quote=Sheepylol][quote=2112]The Bible is actually way more violent and spiteful than the Qur'an[/quote]
Please don't say things like this I actually find it offensive. Out of all the stupid posts in this thread this is the only one that has made me mad. Sure the bible has violence but it is nothing like the quran at all. Really this has to be one of the most ignorant statements I have seen on here. Before you reply could you please go out and read both the quran and the bible (which is something you obviously haven't done) and then think about what you said.
Also peaceful religion am i right guys? xD http://i.imgur.com/uP80YOm.jpg[/quote]
Posts like this are the reason no one can take you seriously. You bristle like crazy the second anyone points out how you're making a double standard specifically for Islam, and in the same post attack the religion like crazy with snarky sarcasm and an actual fucking xD. For the record, the Bible is exactly like the Quran in terms of the crazy amounts of violence and intolerance it is filled with, including actions condoned by God, actions committed in the name of God, and actions committed BY God. An Alien coming to Earth would have a pretty hard fucking time distinguishing between the two.
HildrethI like how this thread has just got everyone latching on to their political agenda, how about some sympathy for the victims?
World is a pretty fucked up place, events like this remind us of how different we all are, we need to celebrate how much alike we all are, for example talk about our love of TF2. After all, that is why we're here.
Other people already responded to this post pretty adequately but I really hate comments like this. On top of coming off to me like a blatant appeal for approval, you're creating a false equivalency between having a political agenda and not having sympathy for the victims. I take pride in my political agenda, because I believe that politics can be one of the most powerful ways to affect peoples' lives, for better or for worse. As a person who is extremely interested in politics and has a very strong and consistent worldview, I would be mad at myself if I DIDN'T enter into debates like this. To me, that would show a bigger lack of sympathy.
I didn't want to bring this up earlier because I felt like it would be too irrelevant/attention-grabby but my dad's family is all French, came over after WWII, and my paternal grandfather worked in the French embassy in Washington, D.C. I got off the phone with him earlier, and thankfully all my relatives in Paris are safe. Given all that, it really upsets me when people try to accuse people who encourage discussion in threads like this as being callous and unconcerned with human life. I realize that was not your specific intent, but it's definitely a strain that runs through a lot of these topics. I am not just sitting on an ivory tower, removed from emotion.
[quote=Hildreth]I like how this thread has just got everyone latching on to their political agenda, how about some sympathy for the victims?
World is a pretty fucked up place, events like this remind us of how different we all are, we need to celebrate how much alike we all are, for example talk about our love of TF2. After all, that is why we're here.[/quote]
Other people already responded to this post pretty adequately but I really hate comments like this. On top of coming off to me like a blatant appeal for approval, you're creating a false equivalency between having a political agenda and not having sympathy for the victims. I take pride in my political agenda, because I believe that politics can be one of the most powerful ways to affect peoples' lives, for better or for worse. As a person who is extremely interested in politics and has a very strong and consistent worldview, I would be mad at myself if I DIDN'T enter into debates like this. To me, that would show a bigger lack of sympathy.
I didn't want to bring this up earlier because I felt like it would be too irrelevant/attention-grabby but my dad's family is all French, came over after WWII, and my paternal grandfather worked in the French embassy in Washington, D.C. I got off the phone with him earlier, and thankfully all my relatives in Paris are safe. Given all that, it really upsets me when people try to accuse people who encourage discussion in threads like this as being callous and unconcerned with human life. I realize that was not your specific intent, but it's definitely a strain that runs through a lot of these topics. I am not just sitting on an ivory tower, removed from emotion.
hoolitrashI could probably create the exact same conclusion on christian morals in the US, should I focus solely on a heavy right-wing state, but that wouldn't be very indicative of american society as a whole, would it
Yeah probably, just hate seeing people trivializing the number of "extremists".
That is a reasonable opinion, there are more extremists than some are willing to admit. However, it's still hard to imagine a world where a lot of these extremists take the step into committing massive terrorist actions in the West, if the West is not taking geopolitical actions that upset lots of those people (the Iraq War, military bases in/our alliance with Saudi Arabia, our continual one-sided support for Israel over Palestine, the entire restructuring of the region that the British, French, and to a smaller degree the U.S. presided over after World War I, the U.S./British overthrow of Mohammed Mosaddegh in Iran, drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen, selling weapons/giving training to numerous actors in the region, our actions at Abu Ghraib and other prisons). I would argue that it takes both forces, that of religious extremism and that of our foreign policy, to produce the situation we have now.
[quote=hooli][quote=trash]I could probably create the exact same conclusion on christian morals in the US, should I focus solely on a heavy right-wing state, but that wouldn't be very indicative of american society as a whole, would it[/quote]
Yeah probably, just hate seeing people trivializing the number of "extremists".[/quote]
That is a reasonable opinion, there are more extremists than some are willing to admit. However, it's still hard to imagine a world where a lot of these extremists take the step into committing massive terrorist actions in the West, if the West is not taking geopolitical actions that upset lots of those people (the Iraq War, military bases in/our alliance with Saudi Arabia, our continual one-sided support for Israel over Palestine, the entire restructuring of the region that the British, French, and to a smaller degree the U.S. presided over after World War I, the U.S./British overthrow of Mohammed Mosaddegh in Iran, drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen, selling weapons/giving training to numerous actors in the region, our actions at Abu Ghraib and other prisons). I would argue that it takes both forces, that of religious extremism and that of our foreign policy, to produce the situation we have now.
mustardoverlordPosts like this are the reason no one can take you seriously. You bristle like crazy the second anyone points out how you're making a double standard specifically for Islam, and in the same post attack the religion like crazy with snarky sarcasm and an actual fucking xD. For the record, the Bible is exactly like the Quran in terms of the crazy amounts of violence and intolerance it is filled with, including actions condoned by God, actions committed in the name of God, and actions committed BY God. An Alien coming to Earth would have a pretty hard fucking time distinguishing between the two.
Yes I should not have done it in a sarcastic way like that but I still think my point is valid. What I was trying to say was Islam isn't a peaceful religion (neither is christianity) but christianity is definitely not more violent or spiteful than the quran, this might be an opinion but all it really takes is 1 read of both the books to realize this.
[quote=mustardoverlord]
Posts like this are the reason no one can take you seriously. You bristle like crazy the second anyone points out how you're making a double standard specifically for Islam, and in the same post attack the religion like crazy with snarky sarcasm and an actual fucking xD. For the record, the Bible is exactly like the Quran in terms of the crazy amounts of violence and intolerance it is filled with, including actions condoned by God, actions committed in the name of God, and actions committed BY God. An Alien coming to Earth would have a pretty hard fucking time distinguishing between the two.[/quote]
Yes I should not have done it in a sarcastic way like that but I still think my point is valid. What I was trying to say was Islam isn't a peaceful religion (neither is christianity) but christianity is definitely not more violent or spiteful than the quran, this might be an opinion but all it really takes is 1 read of both the books to realize this.
SheepylolmustardoverlordPosts like this are the reason no one can take you seriously. You bristle like crazy the second anyone points out how you're making a double standard specifically for Islam, and in the same post attack the religion like crazy with snarky sarcasm and an actual fucking xD. For the record, the Bible is exactly like the Quran in terms of the crazy amounts of violence and intolerance it is filled with, including actions condoned by God, actions committed in the name of God, and actions committed BY God. An Alien coming to Earth would have a pretty hard fucking time distinguishing between the two.
Yes I should not have done it in a sarcastic way like that but I still think my point is valid. What I was trying to say was Islam isn't a peaceful religion (neither is christianity) but christianity is definitely not more violent or spiteful than the quran, this might be an opinion but all it really takes is 1 read of both the books to realize this.
have you read both books? which translations of each?
[quote=Sheepylol][quote=mustardoverlord]
Posts like this are the reason no one can take you seriously. You bristle like crazy the second anyone points out how you're making a double standard specifically for Islam, and in the same post attack the religion like crazy with snarky sarcasm and an actual fucking xD. For the record, the Bible is exactly like the Quran in terms of the crazy amounts of violence and intolerance it is filled with, including actions condoned by God, actions committed in the name of God, and actions committed BY God. An Alien coming to Earth would have a pretty hard fucking time distinguishing between the two.[/quote]
Yes I should not have done it in a sarcastic way like that but I still think my point is valid. What I was trying to say was Islam isn't a peaceful religion (neither is christianity) but christianity is definitely not more violent or spiteful than the quran, this might be an opinion but all it really takes is 1 read of both the books to realize this.[/quote]
have you read both books? which translations of each?
Sheepy when mustard is getting more frags then you its a sign you should stop posting
Sheepy when mustard is getting more frags then you its a sign you should stop posting
as a side-note, I've noticed a lot of ppl from non-western countries refer to IS as "daesh", and I ended up finding this:
https://www.freewordcentre.com/blog/2015/02/daesh-isis-media-alice-guthrie/
And so if the word is basically 'ISIS', but in Arabic, why are the people it describes in such a fury about it? Because they hear it, quite rightly, as a challenge to their legitimacy: a dismissal of their aspirations to define Islamic practice, to be 'a state for all Muslims’ and – crucially – as a refusal to acknowledge and address them as such. They want to be addressed as exactly what they claim to be, by people so in awe of them that they use the pompous, long and delusional name created by the group, not some funny-sounding made-up word. And here is the very simple key point that has been overlooked in all the anglophone press coverage I’ve seen: in Arabic, acronyms are not anything like as widely used as they are in English, and so arabophones are not as used to hearing them as anglophones are. Thus, the creation and use of a title that stands out as a nonsense neologism for an organisation like this one is inherently funny, disrespectful, and ultimately threatening of the organisation’s status. Khaled al-Haj Salih, the Syrian activist who coined the term back in 2013, says that initially even many of his fellow activists, resisting Daesh alongside him, were shocked by the idea of an Arabic acronym, and he had to justify it to them by referencing the tradition of acronyms being used as names by Palestinian organisations (such as Fatah). So saturated in acronyms are we in English that we struggle to imagine this, but it’s true.
All of this means that the name lends itself well to satire, and for the arabophones trying to resist Daesh, humour and satire are essential weapons in their nightmarish struggle. But the satirical weight of the word as a weapon, in the hands of the Syrian activists who have hewn it from the rock of their nightmare reality, does not just consist of the weirdness of acronyms. As well as being an acronym, it is also only one letter different from the word 'daes داعس' , meaning someone or something that crushes or tramples. Of course that doesn’t mean, as many articles have claimed, that 'daesh' is 'another conjugation' of the verb ‘to crush or trample’, nor that that is 'a rough translation of one of the words in the acronym' – it’s simply one letter different from this other word. Imagine if the acronym of 'Islamic State in Iraq and Syria' spelt out ‘S.H.I.D’ in English: activists and critics would certainly seize the opportunity to refer to the organisation as ‘shit’ – but I think it’s safe to say that no serious foreign media outlet would claim that 'shit' was another conjugation of the verb 'shid', nor a rough translation of it. Of course, that analogy is an unfair one, given the hegemonic global linguistic position of English, not to mention the heightened currency of scatological words; but there is a serious point to be made here about the anglophone media’s tendency to give up before it’s begun understanding non-European languages.
And obviously understanding things outside of English, and explaining them to each other via our (social)media hive mind is hugely important on many levels: in the broadest sense, it allows us to attempt to take our place as global citizens, and feeds our connection to other humans on planet Earth. Sadly, the story of the word 'Daesh' is neither the only nor even the worst example of anglophone media failing us in this regard. But there’s something specifically important in this particular story which is being overlooked as a result of all the lazy journalism around it: the use of this word is part of a multi-pronged, diverse range of efforts by Arabs and Muslims to reject the terrorists’ linguistic posturing, their pseudo-classical use of Arabic, their claims to Quranic authority and an absolute foundation in sacred scripture, as reflected in their pompous name. This ridiculous claim has of course been masterfully and witheringly deconstructed at the Islamic level, but at the secular level, satire is a crucial weapon in the fight against these maniacs: there is a fertile tradition of Syrian and satire as not only defiance but coping strategy, and which has been quite under-reported. In satirical Arabic media (and conversation) various diminutives of the word have also gone viral – elegantly diminishing their subject, belittling them, patronising and relegating them to a zone beyond any formal naming in a single sweep.
in a quick TL;DR: acronyms aren't common in arabic, the terrorist org it refers to specifically wants its fancy long name in arabic as a form of sounding powerful, and thus an acronym like "daesh" ends up both taking the piss and taking a shot at their power over islam at the same time
as a side-note, I've noticed a lot of ppl from non-western countries refer to IS as "daesh", and I ended up finding this:
https://www.freewordcentre.com/blog/2015/02/daesh-isis-media-alice-guthrie/
[quote]And so if the word is basically 'ISIS', but in Arabic, why are the people it describes in such a fury about it? Because they hear it, quite rightly, as a challenge to their legitimacy: a dismissal of their aspirations to define Islamic practice, to be 'a state for all Muslims’ and – crucially – as a refusal to acknowledge and address them as such. They want to be addressed as exactly what they claim to be, by people so in awe of them that they use the pompous, long and delusional name created by the group, not some funny-sounding made-up word. And here is the very simple key point that has been overlooked in all the anglophone press coverage I’ve seen: [b]in Arabic, acronyms are not anything like as widely used as they are in English, and so arabophones are not as used to hearing them as anglophones are. Thus, the creation and use of a title that stands out as a nonsense neologism for an organisation like this one is inherently funny, disrespectful, and ultimately threatening of the organisation’s status.[/b] Khaled al-Haj Salih, the Syrian activist who coined the term back in 2013, says that initially even many of his fellow activists, resisting Daesh alongside him, were shocked by the idea of an Arabic acronym, and he had to justify it to them by referencing the tradition of acronyms being used as names by Palestinian organisations (such as Fatah). So saturated in acronyms are we in English that we struggle to imagine this, but it’s true.
All of this means that the name lends itself well to satire, and for the arabophones trying to resist Daesh, humour and satire are essential weapons in their nightmarish struggle. But the satirical weight of the word as a weapon, in the hands of the Syrian activists who have hewn it from the rock of their nightmare reality, does not just consist of the weirdness of acronyms. As well as being an acronym, it is also only one letter different from the word 'daes داعس' , meaning someone or something that crushes or tramples. Of course that doesn’t mean, as many articles have claimed, that 'daesh' is 'another conjugation' of the verb ‘to crush or trample’, nor that that is 'a rough translation of one of the words in the acronym' – it’s simply one letter different from this other word. Imagine if the acronym of 'Islamic State in Iraq and Syria' spelt out ‘S.H.I.D’ in English: activists and critics would certainly seize the opportunity to refer to the organisation as ‘shit’ – but I think it’s safe to say that no serious foreign media outlet would claim that 'shit' was another conjugation of the verb 'shid', nor a rough translation of it. Of course, that analogy is an unfair one, given the hegemonic global linguistic position of English, not to mention the heightened currency of scatological words; but there is a serious point to be made here about the anglophone media’s tendency to give up before it’s begun understanding non-European languages.
And obviously understanding things outside of English, and explaining them to each other via our (social)media hive mind is hugely important on many levels: in the broadest sense, it allows us to attempt to take our place as global citizens, and feeds our connection to other humans on planet Earth. Sadly, the story of the word 'Daesh' is neither the only nor even the worst example of anglophone media failing us in this regard. But there’s something specifically important in this particular story which is being overlooked as a result of all the lazy journalism around it: [b]the use of this word is part of a multi-pronged, diverse range of efforts by Arabs and Muslims to reject the terrorists’ linguistic posturing, their pseudo-classical use of Arabic, their claims to Quranic authority and an absolute foundation in sacred scripture[/b], as reflected in their pompous name. This ridiculous claim has of course been masterfully and witheringly deconstructed at the Islamic level, but at the secular level, satire is a crucial weapon in the fight against these maniacs: there is a fertile tradition of Syrian and satire as not only defiance but coping strategy, and which has been quite under-reported. In satirical Arabic media (and conversation) various diminutives of the word have also gone viral – elegantly diminishing their subject, belittling them, patronising and relegating them to a zone beyond any formal naming in a single sweep.[/quote]
in a quick TL;DR: acronyms aren't common in arabic, the terrorist org it refers to specifically wants its fancy long name in arabic as a form of sounding powerful, and thus an acronym like "daesh" ends up both taking the piss and taking a shot at their power over islam at the same time
owl
have you read both books? which translations of each?
Nope. I have read the bible quite extensively throughout (many different translations) but i'm not gonna lie and say I have read the entirety of the quran although I do think I have read enough to be able to form a valid opinion on it. So based on what I have read I think the quran is much more hostile than the bible and I think I have perfectly good reasons for this.
kounterpartsSheepy when mustard is getting more frags then you its a sign you should stop posting
I don't have plus or minus frags enabled because I think all they do is prevent people from posting their real opinion, or it makes it so that people post an opinion that they know will appeal to the masses so they will get upvoted (this is one of the reasons reddit is horrible). You would be surprised at how much people care about what people think of them on the internet.
If people really want me to stop posting I will do so and won't make any more future posts on this thread. Although I don't really understand how my posting is doing any real harm. I think its good for people to have discussions and voice their opinion and this is why I post what I really think and not worry how many people agree or disagree with me.
[quote=owl]
have you read both books? which translations of each?[/quote]
Nope. I have read the bible quite extensively throughout (many different translations) but i'm not gonna lie and say I have read the entirety of the quran although I do think I have read enough to be able to form a valid opinion on it. So based on what I have read I think the quran is much more hostile than the bible and I think I have perfectly good reasons for this.
[quote=kounterparts]Sheepy when mustard is getting more frags then you its a sign you should stop posting[/quote]
I don't have plus or minus frags enabled because I think all they do is prevent people from posting their real opinion, or it makes it so that people post an opinion that they know will appeal to the masses so they will get upvoted (this is one of the reasons reddit is horrible). You would be surprised at how much people care about what people think of them on the internet.
If people really want me to stop posting I will do so and won't make any more future posts on this thread. Although I don't really understand how my posting is doing any real harm. I think its good for people to have discussions and voice their opinion and this is why I post what I really think and not worry how many people agree or disagree with me.
holy shit i cant even write this much for school
holy shit i cant even write this much for school
ikpureaim-A lot of you guys are showing your true colors, yikes. I'm sure that the Quran doesn't say kill for the hell of it knowing that none of you guys have read it for yourselves and just cherry picking verses. The media has done an exceptional job of pretty much nailing people of the Islamic race as a whole. No it's not just extremists of Islam but a certain sect of the Sunnis.
Just please stop bashing the religion in this thread if you're viewing it from an outsiders perspective!
Some facts for you. Don't generalize Sunnis because 90% of all muslims are Sunnis. Thats 90% of 1.6 billion people and not all of them are extremists I mean come on there are 1.6 billion muslims in the world if Islam bred terror everyone would be dead by now. The combines forces in total of Islamic State, Boko Haram and Al Qaeda makes up 0.003% of the global muslim population. Less than 2% of all terror attacks are carried out in the name of Islam. I've read the entire Quran, I've read the Bible as well. That doesn't make me an expert on this topic at all but its enough to prove to me that the majority of the people who posted in this thread about Islam haven't read the Quran and are forming prejudice opinions on Islam through their cherry picked verses of the Quran. The same people aren't able to put those verses into context or know what they actually mean because they lack the background knowledge to do so.
I believe he was referring to ISIS as a group composed of two extremist branches of sects from Sunni Islam -- not Sunnis in general, or Wahhabis/Salafis as a whole. The majority of Muslims are Sunni and they do not represent the actions of this terrorist group. It's very saddening that less than 5% of 1.6 billion people suddenly are chosen by the media to represent Muslims on a wide scale. Aside from cultivating more hatred and distrust, associating revered phrases with actions of terror continually is a sore indicator of how much willful ignorance still exists in our world.
Yes ISIS is a religious terrorist group. And yes it is run by Muslims. Yes, these specific Muslims choose to represent Islam as a violent political struggle. Yes, this is one representation of the religion. To all hating on Islam or religion in general: you are allowed to judge a religion based on its adherents -- but keep in mind how you do it because a small marginalized group does not represent the whole most accurately.
This doesn't just apply to Islam, it applies to any other religion. If you truly want to understand a religion please stop judging it completely by its adherents and try to understand the doctrine of what the religion itself wants to be. Reading a page of wikipedia overnight doesn't make you an expert on it. Hearing something from Fox News doesn't make you informed. It takes years, a lot of research and reading to fully understand a doctrine and all its implications.
Yes people do represent their religion to some extent, but people are not perfect. They are certainly capable of contradicting their own religion, whether out of stupidity or personal gain. Fun fact ISIS has never read and understood a page of the Quran because everything they are doing is going against the religious doctrine adopted and practiced by 95% of Muslims around the world. To link their fanatical actions to that major religious doctrine, and then start hating on the religion and its adherents, is an incredibly stupid thing to do.
I really don’t want to open up a can of worms but no country really has a spotless history. Yes Middle Eastern countries are abundant in terror and violence – even among its own people – but it’s not like the USA has never committed genocide on Native Americans or bombed tons of deleted uranium in civilian areas in Iraq. Let’s not kid ourselves here. Violence is violence. Wherever it is, however it is. I understand you want to be patriotic but stop cherry-picking and misrepresenting actual history please.
I’m saddened deeply by the Paris terror attacks and how people were targeted for bloodshed. They were ordinary people just like you and me and to suddenly learn that your family or loved one is gone forever must be devastating. There’s nothing these people will be able to do to bring their loved ones back and it’s heartbreaking, completely unjust. These people will want retribution which is understandable but all I can say is I hope it goes out to the people who actually deserve it.
[quote=ikpure][quote=aim-]A lot of you guys are showing your true colors, yikes. I'm sure that the Quran doesn't say kill for the hell of it knowing that none of you guys have read it for yourselves and just cherry picking verses. The media has done an exceptional job of pretty much nailing people of the Islamic race as a whole. No it's not just extremists of Islam but a certain sect of the Sunnis.
Just please stop bashing the religion in this thread if you're viewing it from an outsiders perspective![/quote]
Some facts for you. Don't generalize Sunnis because 90% of all muslims are Sunnis. Thats 90% of 1.6 billion people and not all of them are extremists I mean come on there are 1.6 billion muslims in the world if Islam bred terror everyone would be dead by now. The combines forces in total of Islamic State, Boko Haram and Al Qaeda makes up 0.003% of the global muslim population. Less than 2% of all terror attacks are carried out in the name of Islam. I've read the entire Quran, I've read the Bible as well. That doesn't make me an expert on this topic at all but its enough to prove to me that the majority of the people who posted in this thread about Islam haven't read the Quran and are forming prejudice opinions on Islam through their cherry picked verses of the Quran. The same people aren't able to put those verses into context or know what they actually mean because they lack the background knowledge to do so.[/quote]
I believe he was referring to ISIS as a group composed of two extremist branches of sects from Sunni Islam -- not Sunnis in general, or Wahhabis/Salafis as a whole. The majority of Muslims are Sunni and they do not represent the actions of this terrorist group. It's very saddening that less than 5% of 1.6 billion people suddenly are chosen by the media to represent Muslims on a wide scale. Aside from cultivating more hatred and distrust, associating revered phrases with actions of terror continually is a sore indicator of how much willful ignorance still exists in our world.
Yes ISIS is a religious terrorist group. And yes it is run by Muslims. Yes, these specific Muslims choose to represent Islam as a violent political struggle. Yes, this is one representation of the religion. To all hating on Islam or religion in general: you are allowed to judge a religion based on its adherents -- but keep in mind how you do it because a small marginalized group does not represent the whole most accurately.
This doesn't just apply to Islam, it applies to any other religion. If you truly want to understand a religion please stop judging it completely by its adherents and try to understand the doctrine of what the religion itself wants to be. Reading a page of wikipedia overnight doesn't make you an expert on it. Hearing something from Fox News doesn't make you informed. It takes years, a lot of research and reading to fully understand a doctrine and all its implications.
Yes people do represent their religion to some extent, but people are not perfect. They are certainly capable of contradicting their own religion, whether out of stupidity or personal gain. Fun fact ISIS has never read and understood a page of the Quran because everything they are doing is going against the religious doctrine adopted and practiced by 95% of Muslims around the world. To link their fanatical actions to that major religious doctrine, and then start hating on the religion and its adherents, is an incredibly stupid thing to do.
I really don’t want to open up a can of worms but no country really has a spotless history. Yes Middle Eastern countries are abundant in terror and violence – even among its own people – but it’s not like the USA has never committed genocide on Native Americans or bombed tons of deleted uranium in civilian areas in Iraq. Let’s not kid ourselves here. Violence is violence. Wherever it is, however it is. I understand you want to be patriotic but stop cherry-picking and misrepresenting actual history please.
I’m saddened deeply by the Paris terror attacks and how people were targeted for bloodshed. They were ordinary people just like you and me and to suddenly learn that your family or loved one is gone forever must be devastating. There’s nothing these people will be able to do to bring their loved ones back and it’s heartbreaking, completely unjust. These people will want retribution which is understandable but all I can say is I hope it goes out to the people who actually deserve it.
mustardoverlordElliot Rodgers was pretty objectively a men's rights activist
I'd really like some proof on this. Hating women for not giving you the sex you feel entitled to does not make you a men's rights activist. It might make you resemble an extreme caricature of one, but i really hope that wasn't your point.
[quote=mustardoverlord]Elliot Rodgers was pretty objectively a men's rights activist[/quote] I'd really like some proof on this. Hating women for not giving you the sex you feel entitled to does not make you a men's rights activist. It might make you resemble an extreme caricature of one, but i really hope that wasn't your point.
SheepylolIt is 100% normal to associate unpleasant events with unpleasant thoughts, it has nothing to do with "racism" or "islamophobia", The same thing would happen if it were Australians blowing people up - people would start associating negative thoughts and feelings towards australian people despite the fact that not all the australians were blowing stuff up. Its not racism or "islamophobia" to be scared of muslims nowadays, it is basic human psychology: negative events = negative feelings towards something.
I would counter by saying that, logically, terrorist acts by Australians/Muslims should not result in people thinking negatively of Australians/Muslims - it should result in people thinking negatively of terrorists. This is pretty basic logic and I'm sure this point has been mentioned thousands of times over the past couple of days.
[quote=Sheepylol]It is 100% normal to associate unpleasant events with unpleasant thoughts, it has nothing to do with "racism" or "islamophobia", The same thing would happen if it were Australians blowing people up - people would start associating negative thoughts and feelings towards australian people despite the fact that not all the australians were blowing stuff up. Its not racism or "islamophobia" to be scared of muslims nowadays, it is basic human psychology: negative events = negative feelings towards something.[/quote]
I would counter by saying that, logically, terrorist acts by Australians/Muslims should not result in people thinking negatively of Australians/Muslims - it should result in people thinking negatively of terrorists. This is pretty basic logic and I'm sure this point has been mentioned thousands of times over the past couple of days.
mustardoverlordWith 1.6 Billion Muslims in the world, if even 1% of them are extremists then we need to worry about 16 million of these idiots causing us harm. Lots of estimates are well above 1% so don't act like it was just 8 guys in Paris out for a stroll with guns and bombs completely not representative of a HUGE amount of people who agree with killing us.
Yes, and with the largest army in the world and relatively indiscriminate rules about what defines an enemy combatant, a lot of people need to worry about us causing them harm. It doesn't change the fact that your fear of Muslims is disproportionate to the actual likelihood that the dude who deliberately choose to immigrate to the United States that you see on the street is going to cause you harm.
SpaceCadetYou keep worrying about "statistics" and and whatever college professors paper you happen to read and agree with on a Friday night. While you and the medic do that, the next terror plot is being sketched out in some random house right now by a group of people who should not be in either country to begin with.
How did I know that, after I brought up actual fact, as well as terms like "American exceptionalism", you were going to make a blatant appeal to anti-intellectualism. Just because you are not smart enough to understand how what you're saying is filled with double standards and bigotry, doesn't mean others are not.
Yes, obviously we'd all like terrorists not to be in our country. We'd also like police officers to have a 100% rate of stopping murders before they happen, but the Bill of Rights protects against police officers committing unlawful searches and seizures and soldiers taking quarter in our houses, as well as gives us all due process, the right to an attorney, the right to be tried by a jury of our peers, etc. Unless we have a magic wand that we can wave that tells us exactly where the terrorists are, I don't see why we should have the right to harass innocent Americans, especially when our mistreatment of Muslims gives more ammunition to the rhetoric of groups like ISIS and helps them recruit more people.
First off, at no time will I ever fear these people. The chances are extremely high that, if they ever try this shit around me, I will not be one of the cattle for slaughter they expect. I am going to return fire and we can see what happens after.
Secondly, nothing I said was a double standard. If you want to defend these people then that is on you. I have every right to want these people out of my country. They come here for free and have done nothing to build this country to what it is today. They leech off our schools and financial programs then go back "home" to their countries and help build shit over there instead of staying and building in the USA.
[quote=mustardoverlord]
With 1.6 Billion Muslims in the world, if even 1% of them are extremists then we need to worry about 16 million of these idiots causing us harm. Lots of estimates are well above 1% so don't act like it was just 8 guys in Paris out for a stroll with guns and bombs completely not representative of a HUGE amount of people who agree with killing us.
Yes, and with the largest army in the world and relatively indiscriminate rules about what defines an enemy combatant, a lot of people need to worry about us causing them harm. It doesn't change the fact that your fear of Muslims is disproportionate to the actual likelihood that the dude who deliberately choose to immigrate to the United States that you see on the street is going to cause you harm.
[quote=SpaceCadet]
You keep worrying about "statistics" and and whatever college professors paper you happen to read and agree with on a Friday night. While you and the medic do that, the next terror plot is being sketched out in some random house right now by a group of people who should not be in either country to begin with.[/quote]
How did I know that, after I brought up actual fact, as well as terms like "American exceptionalism", you were going to make a blatant appeal to anti-intellectualism. Just because you are not smart enough to understand how what you're saying is filled with double standards and bigotry, doesn't mean others are not.
Yes, obviously we'd all like terrorists not to be in our country. We'd also like police officers to have a 100% rate of stopping murders before they happen, but the Bill of Rights protects against police officers committing unlawful searches and seizures and soldiers taking quarter in our houses, as well as gives us all due process, the right to an attorney, the right to be tried by a jury of our peers, etc. Unless we have a magic wand that we can wave that tells us exactly where the terrorists are, I don't see why we should have the right to harass innocent Americans, especially when our mistreatment of Muslims gives more ammunition to the rhetoric of groups like ISIS and helps them recruit more people.[/quote]
First off, at no time will I ever fear these people. The chances are extremely high that, if they ever try this shit around me, I will not be one of the cattle for slaughter they expect. I am going to return fire and we can see what happens after.
Secondly, nothing I said was a double standard. If you want to defend these people then that is on you. I have every right to want these people out of my country. They come here for free and have done nothing to build this country to what it is today. They leech off our schools and financial programs then go back "home" to their countries and help build shit over there instead of staying and building in the USA.
How are you going to differentiate between "those people" and brown people who just want to come here and earn the same opportunities that you've been handed from birth?
Or is the only good America a white America?
How are you going to differentiate between "those people" and brown people who just want to come here and earn the same opportunities that you've been handed from birth?
Or is the only good America a white America?
owlHow are you going to differentiate between "those people" and brown people who just want to come here and earn the same opportunities that you've been handed from birth?
Or is the only good America a white America?
Incidents like 9/11 and this Paris attack prove than we need to heavily screen anyone coming into this country. The rules of the game have changed and thus the immigration laws need to change. I wasn't "handed" anything at all, I have given back more than my share and support my country. My family's past has provided for me and served this country just like countless others. I can trace my roots back to before the civil war so my pride in America runs deep.
You and Mustard say "white america" over and over but I challenge either of you to find where I once said the same thing. It seems you have the problem with race and not I. My issue is with the security of this country and not letting these people in so freely in the future.
[quote=owl]How are you going to differentiate between "those people" and brown people who just want to come here and earn the same opportunities that you've been handed from birth?
Or is the only good America a white America?[/quote]
Incidents like 9/11 and this Paris attack prove than we need to heavily screen anyone coming into this country. The rules of the game have changed and thus the immigration laws need to change. I wasn't "handed" anything at all, I have given back more than my share and support my country. My family's past has provided for me and served this country just like countless others. I can trace my roots back to before the civil war so my pride in America runs deep.
You and Mustard say "white america" over and over but I challenge either of you to find where I once said the same thing. It seems you have the problem with race and not I. My issue is with the security of this country and not letting these people in so freely in the future.
"these people"
you can say the word "muslim" out loud, you know. that's what you're explicitly referring to, trying to mildly cover it isn't helping you
"these people"
you can say the word "muslim" out loud, you know. that's what you're explicitly referring to, trying to mildly cover it isn't helping you
any1 with a 26566 character esea bio is clinically insane tbh
any1 with a 26566 character esea bio is clinically insane tbh
trash"these people"
you can say the word "muslim" out loud, you know. that's what you're explicitly referring to, trying to mildly cover it isn't helping you
I have no intention of covering up anything it was simply the way I typed but if you want to be technical, I am referring to any terrorist entering this country and causing us harm as "these people". It is understandable that you refered to Muslims as "these people". It just so happens that most of the terrorist running around today happen to be extremist Muslims.
[quote=trash]"these people"
you can say the word "muslim" out loud, you know. that's what you're explicitly referring to, trying to mildly cover it isn't helping you[/quote]
I have no intention of covering up anything it was simply the way I typed but if you want to be technical, I am referring to any terrorist entering this country and causing us harm as "these people". It is understandable that you refered to Muslims as "these people". It just so happens that most of the terrorist running around today happen to be extremist Muslims.
Getawhale
I would counter by saying that, logically, terrorist acts by Australians/Muslims should not result in people thinking negatively of Australians/Muslims - it should result in people thinking negatively of terrorists. This is pretty basic logic and I'm sure this point has been mentioned thousands of times over the past couple of days.
Obviously it is logical to not feel any hostility towards entire races, sex or counties because certain people from a certain race, sex or country have caused one grief in any form in the past. Unfortunately this is not how human psychology works - I can go back to my example of women who are abused by men at a young age, if a young girl is repeatedly sexually abused by a specific gender (lets say men here) then the child will begin to have negative associations with not only the man who was abusing her but also with men in general, obviously not all men sexually abuse little girls but even if the girl knows that she can't help but feel scared or angry at any man she comes into contact with because it was a man who did it, It can take years of therapy for the girl to be able to trust men again and some women can go their whole lives never trusting men because of what one man did to them.
Obviously this is quite a different example but the psychology is very similar. It happened to america after 9/11 and its happening to Europe now. People are going to start negatively associating Islam as a religion and the people who follow it because of what a few crazy Muslims did. People know that not all Muslims are killers and they know that the Muslim they are talking to is perfectly harmless and probably a really nice guy. However the young girl who was sexually abused knows that the majority of men she comes into contact with are also harmless and probably really nice guys as well, despite this she will still have extreme difficulty for the rest of her life trusting men in general because of what one man did to her.
Most of us haven't been affected too badly by Muslims in our lifetime so we might find it hard to understand why a lot of people find it hard to trust Muslims nowadays just like the girl who wasn't sexually abused finds it hard to understand why the other girl who was can't talk to men.
With something like this happening, those of us with empathy are affected when people are killed so brutally like they were in Paris. Sometimes this is what causes "Islamophobia" or "racism". It's not always illogical hatred or ignorance like you all seem to think it is - it sometimes comes down to reasonable negative association. I am not defending racism but I think sometimes extremely racist people need therapy and help instead of more hatred thrown at them by people who don't understand what has caused them to be "racist" in the first place. You find it hard to understand something that you have never experienced
So this is why the more this kind of thing happens, the more people will start to worry when they see that their taxi driver is Muslim or that their new best friend has turned to Islam. People will fear their safety because the people causing these events call themselves Muslim. Its not illogical at all really, it mainly comes down to basic psychology. People can really turn their views around if they acknowledge and understand why they are feeling this way about Muslims. It's important to know that how they are feeling isn't entirely unjustified and they are not bad people for feeling like this. This is why people need to stop throwing around the word "racist" here when someone says anything remotely against Islam, all it will do is make them feel worse and it will certainly not help to change their views.
I can promise you that if your mother was one of the people gunned down in Paris on Friday. You would find it very hard to accept and trust Muslims for a long time.
[quote=Getawhale]
I would counter by saying that, logically, terrorist acts by Australians/Muslims should not result in people thinking negatively of Australians/Muslims - it should result in people thinking negatively of terrorists. This is pretty basic logic and I'm sure this point has been mentioned thousands of times over the past couple of days.[/quote]
Obviously it is logical to not feel any hostility towards entire races, sex or counties because certain people from a certain race, sex or country have caused one grief in any form in the past. Unfortunately this is not how human psychology works - I can go back to my example of women who are abused by men at a young age, if a young girl is repeatedly sexually abused by a specific gender (lets say men here) then the child will begin to have negative associations with not only the man who was abusing her but also with men in general, obviously not all men sexually abuse little girls but even if the girl knows that she can't help but feel scared or angry at any man she comes into contact with because it was a man who did it, It can take years of therapy for the girl to be able to trust men again and some women can go their whole lives never trusting men because of what one man did to them.
Obviously this is quite a different example but the psychology is very similar. It happened to america after 9/11 and its happening to Europe now. People are going to start negatively associating Islam as a religion and the people who follow it because of what a few crazy Muslims did. People know that not all Muslims are killers and they know that the Muslim they are talking to is perfectly harmless and probably a really nice guy. However the young girl who was sexually abused knows that the majority of men she comes into contact with are also harmless and probably really nice guys as well, despite this she will still have extreme difficulty for the rest of her life trusting men in general because of what one man did to her.
Most of us haven't been affected too badly by Muslims in our lifetime so we might find it hard to understand why a lot of people find it hard to trust Muslims nowadays just like the girl who wasn't sexually abused finds it hard to understand why the other girl who was can't talk to men.
With something like this happening, those of us with empathy are affected when people are killed so brutally like they were in Paris. Sometimes this is what causes "Islamophobia" or "racism". It's not always illogical hatred or ignorance like you all seem to think it is - it sometimes comes down to reasonable negative association. I am not defending racism but I think sometimes extremely racist people need therapy and help instead of more hatred thrown at them by people who don't understand what has caused them to be "racist" in the first place. You find it hard to understand something that you have never experienced
So this is why the more this kind of thing happens, the more people will start to worry when they see that their taxi driver is Muslim or that their new best friend has turned to Islam. People will fear their safety because the people causing these events call themselves Muslim. Its not illogical at all really, it mainly comes down to basic psychology. People can really turn their views around if they acknowledge and understand why they are feeling this way about Muslims. It's important to know that how they are feeling isn't entirely unjustified and they are not bad people for feeling like this. This is why people need to stop throwing around the word "racist" here when someone says anything remotely against Islam, all it will do is make them feel worse and it will certainly not help to change their views.
I can promise you that if your mother was one of the people gunned down in Paris on Friday. You would find it very hard to accept and trust Muslims for a long time.
SpaceCadet[I am referring to any terrorist entering this country and causing us harm as "these people".
They come here for free and have done nothing to build this country to what it is today. They leech off our schools and financial programs then go back "home" to their countries
you're pretty explicitly referring to immigration, no matter how hard you try to push it otherwise. that's a race thing. heavy profiling off of someone's race-and-culture-created looks and nothing else is a pretty hardcore race thing, even
[quote=SpaceCadet][I am referring to any terrorist entering this country and causing us harm as "these people".[/quote]
[quote]They come here for free and have done nothing to build this country to what it is today. They leech off our schools and financial programs then go back "home" to their countries[/quote]
you're pretty explicitly referring to immigration, no matter how hard you try to push it otherwise. that's a race thing. heavy profiling off of someone's race-and-culture-created looks and nothing else is a pretty hardcore race thing, even
trashSpaceCadet[I am referring to any terrorist entering this country and causing us harm as "these people".
They come here for free and have done nothing to build this country to what it is today. They leech off our schools and financial programs then go back "home" to their countries
you're pretty explicitly referring to immigration, no matter how hard you try to push it otherwise. that's a race thing. heavy profiling off of someone's race-and-culture-created looks and nothing else is a pretty hardcore race thing, even
Of course I am referring to immigration, I said it in my own post. Keeping these people out of our country is the best and only way to keep these attacks from happening. As I said, the rules of the game have changed and our laws need to reflect that.
You can disagree with my point of view on immigration, that is your right. Just don't be among the crowd screaming "how did they get in the country?" when an attack of greater magnitude hits in the USA.
[quote=trash][quote=SpaceCadet][I am referring to any terrorist entering this country and causing us harm as "these people".[/quote]
[quote]They come here for free and have done nothing to build this country to what it is today. They leech off our schools and financial programs then go back "home" to their countries[/quote]
you're pretty explicitly referring to immigration, no matter how hard you try to push it otherwise. that's a race thing. heavy profiling off of someone's race-and-culture-created looks and nothing else is a pretty hardcore race thing, even[/quote]
Of course I am referring to immigration, I said it in my own post. Keeping these people out of our country is the best and only way to keep these attacks from happening. As I said, the rules of the game have changed and our laws need to reflect that.
You can disagree with my point of view on immigration, that is your right. Just don't be among the crowd screaming "how did they get in the country?" when an attack of greater magnitude hits in the USA.
sheepylolIt's important to know that how they are feeling isn't entirely unjustified and they are not bad people for feeling like this. This is why people need to stop throwing around the word "racist" here when someone says anything remotely against Islam, all it will do is make them feel worse and it will certainly not help to change their views.
"my racism is okay because it involved a bad scenario" is still racism. you don't get to will away the consequences of what that means, and you definitely better not be willing to go into a discussion thread thinking you should continue to live in ignorance if this is what you strongly believe
SpaceCadetYou can disagree with my point of view on immigration, that is your right. Just don't be among the crowd screaming "how did they get in the country?" when an attack of greater magnitude hits in the USA.
oh boy, fox news rhetoric, my fav
1) I'm not even american, there's like a flag of where I'm from RIGHT ABOVE THIS TEXT! and, in my magical land, we let a lot of different people in for quite a while, to the point that our ministry cabinet just straight-up has a sikh leading our entire military now. funny enough, we have yet to explode from sheer cultural impact
2) if you were actually as emphasized on "safety" as you proudly believed yourself to be, surely you'd be eyeing up the massive number of gun-related deaths in america, a statistic which doesn't even just eclipse all terrorist deaths in america since 2001, but actually beats that number on a monthly basis? statistically, you're not actually accomplishing much if you want safety
3) if you actually had any understanding of who the daesh were beyond your shitty pre-historic brain mentality of "MAN IN STRANGE GARB, MUST REMOVE", you would realize that they and you are actually the best of pals in this world. they want people like you, because your bullshit creates more misinformation, and that lets them justify to more ignorance
[quote=sheepylol]It's important to know that how they are feeling isn't entirely unjustified and they are not bad people for feeling like this. This is why people need to stop throwing around the word "racist" here when someone says anything remotely against Islam, all it will do is make them feel worse and it will certainly not help to change their views.[/quote]
"my racism is okay because it involved a bad scenario" is still racism. you don't get to will away the consequences of what that means, and you definitely better not be willing to go into a discussion thread thinking you should continue to live in ignorance if this is what you strongly believe
[quote=SpaceCadet]You can disagree with my point of view on immigration, that is your right. Just don't be among the crowd screaming "how did they get in the country?" when an attack of greater magnitude hits in the USA.[/quote]
oh boy, fox news rhetoric, my fav
1) I'm not even american, there's like a flag of where I'm from RIGHT ABOVE THIS TEXT! and, in my magical land, we let a lot of different people in for quite a while, to the point that our ministry cabinet just straight-up has a sikh leading our entire military now. funny enough, we have yet to explode from sheer cultural impact
2) if you were actually as emphasized on "safety" as you proudly believed yourself to be, surely you'd be eyeing up the massive number of gun-related deaths in america, a statistic which doesn't even just eclipse all terrorist deaths in america since 2001, but actually beats that number on a monthly basis? statistically, you're not actually accomplishing much if you want safety
3) if you actually had any understanding of who the daesh were beyond your shitty pre-historic brain mentality of "MAN IN STRANGE GARB, MUST REMOVE", you would realize that they and you are actually the best of pals in this world. they want people like you, because your bullshit creates more misinformation, and that lets them justify to more ignorance